Patrick:
The locals have confirmed time and time again about the SPECIFICS you continue to argue about: the wind and all other aspects of the hole you've never played - Delta View #18.
And for about the 55th time, none of us have ever claimed that
"the holes are similar." We've claimed that the PLAY on each is similar, and we've given exruciating details as to the many similarities and the few small differences.
But whatever. It remains clear you know our area better than those of us who live here, so arguing the details is pointless.
Now as for CPC16, I found a scorecard. I trust you won't require a scan for proof? Here is what is says on the back of the card:
U.S.G.A. RULES APPLY
Local Rules
Ocean holes 15, 16, and 17. Cliff and beach played as part of the course, and not water hazard. Deer prints can be repaired on greens only.
So I did have this slightly incorrect - it's the cliffs and beach that are part of the course, not the ocean itself. BUT OF COURSE THAT CHANGES NONE OF THE POINT I MADE: which is that at both courses, a shot long and left could result in lost ball. Shots long and left at DV either get lost in the long rough in front of the fence, or go over the fence (and of course are OB, but the play and penalty is the same). At CPC, it's a long way to the actual water long and left; the vast majority of balls that don't get found get lost in the high rough and rocks on the cliff, or just don't get found on the beach itself. It's a long stretch to assume any ball that direction actually finds the water. It is possible, yes. But that doesn't change the play.... if one hits a ball that direction and there's any chance it goes over the cliff, one at the very least hits a provisional.
Thus the effect is the same at the two holes. Shots long and left most likely result in a three from the tee situation. And you'll note my original point in calling this a similarity said "lost ball possibility long and left."
Now as for the rest, yes I would call that hole less meritorious than a similar hole with a beautiful view behind. It still is likely a great golf hole... the lack of beauty behind does not take that away... I just do believe a similar golf hole with beauty behind would give more joy to the player, so it seems very logical to me to say it would be more meritorious. And I believe most golfers are with me on this. I doubt many golfers find zero value in beauty outside the bounds of the course but directly in view, as you do.
But fair enough. We've gone as far as we can go on that distinction, which I find kinda silly but understand is fundamental to you.
As it pertains to these two holes at hand though, let's say you give us the benefit of the doubt and the similarities and small differences are what we say. If that's the case, then is it the small differences in play that make CPC the superior hole?
Note the differences would be only this:
- all carry over water for all layups at CPC; carry over water for 95% of layups utilized at DV, but a possibility for a 70 yard chip followed by a 130 yard carry over water.
- slightly higher raised tee and green. Assume slightly - that is, not making a significant difference in play.
- more bunkers surrounding green.
And that's it. In that scenario what would make CPC the superior golf hole? Just these small differences? If so you put a lot of weight on some pretty trivial things... But would it be the beauty that you consider part of the course? If so, I could live with that as at least you are acknowlodging a role for scenic beauty, which I did think you minimalized prior to this discussion. I'd also find it silly to maintain that this beauty somehow stops at the edge of the golf course, but you're silly about a lot of things, so that's OK.
TH